Account For Missing N100bn Dirty Notes, Group Tells CBN

The Deputy Director of SERAP, Kolawole Oluwadare, chastised the apex bank in a statement released on Sunday for failing to disclose the whereabouts of the specified sum.

He added that in order to force the CBN to "direct and compel the CBN to explain the whereabouts of the over N100 billion dirty and bad notes kept in various branches of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) since 2017," the group went to the Federal High Court in Lagos.

Additionally, SERAP requests that the court "order and force the CBN to explain the whereabouts of the N7.2 billion intended for the establishment of the CBN Dutse branch in 2010 and the N4.8 billion allocated for the rehabilitation of the CBN Abeokuta branch in 2009 and to publish the names of contractors who collected the money.”
Additionally, it requests that the court "direct and compel the CBN to explain the whereabouts of the allegedly missing outstanding loan of N1.9 billion given to the government of Anambra state between 2015 and 2016 and the allegedly missing outstanding loan of N1.2 billion granted to the government of Enugu State in 2015."

SERAP is arguing in the lawsuit that "it would serve the public interest and end the impunity of perpetrators to explain the whereabouts of the missing public funds, publish the names of those suspected to be responsible and ensure that they are brought to justice and the full recovery of any missing public funds."

Part of the lawsuit that SERAP's attorneys, Kolawole Oluwadare and Mrs. Adelanke Aremo, filed on the group's behalf stated: "Nigerians have a right to know the whereabouts of the public funds." The right of Nigerians to restoration, compensation, and a guarantee against repetition would progress if the requested reliefs were granted.

The Financial Regulations of 2009 provide in paragraph 708 that "payment for services not yet rendered or for goods not yet supplied shall not be made on any account."

"Once a mobilisation fee has been paid to any supplier or contractor, no further payment shall be made to the supplier or contractor without an interim performance certificate," according to Section 35(2) of the Public Procurement Act of 2007.

The suit hearing has not yet been scheduled.